Pages

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Lululemon Shutting Down Facebook Groups

I have to run to a school event but Lulumum put up a great post about lululemon going after private - closed and secret - Facebook groups (and the personal accounts of the admins of those groups) that have been shut down because they posted photos from the lululemon website. I know lots of people have had their eBay listings VERO'd recently for using web store images but this is something new that started today.

33 comments:

Anonymous
said...

I'm a member of a lot of the fb groups and there is a lot of fear and anger towards lulu. People are saying they should be putting money into fixing their quality issues rather than going after people "stealing" photos and intellectual property. They are also saying items being sold for profit is grounds for deletion as well. I tend to agree, we should be able to trade and sell items we purchase with our own money. I had no idea they could dictate what we do with our own property!

So will they go after you and Lulumum next for occasionally posting their images? Can they shut down blogs the way they can kill the Facebook groups and eBay listings? (I have had ebay listings removed by lulu)

Go to the lulu site. I can see why they would shut down the facebook pages. Let's see how this story develops. I actually disagree with people using copyrighted images for their use without permission.

That is VERY disappointing. I checked and the Trading Post and Exchange are still up - but this censorship is downright rude and not going to have a positive impact.

I do love her stance of drawing on every single photo. Hopefully that hammers the point home.

The company continues to get tackier and tackier every day. It's not as if the photos were being used to advertise other product (at least that is my understanding) - so why close the groups unless you don't like the commentary in them... hmm?

This site has some interesting articles about VERO take downs and images: http://www.tabberone.com/Trademarks/CopyrightLaw/ImageTextTheft/ImageTextTheft.shtml

Lululemon is not in the business of selling images of their clothes, they sell clothes themselves so using a photo in an ebay listing does not mnetarily hurt lululemon since they already got the money for the item of clothing. I personally think each eBay auction should use a photo of the actual item for sale. However, I believe they are trying to shut put the clamp on the after market sales. I think that is cutting off their nose to spite their face because I buy a lot more lululemon than I otherwise would because I know I can resell it for a substantial amount of what I paid for it.

The other thing is that there are numerous fake lululemon website selling fakes that look a lot like the real thing and they aren't being shut down. I don't know why eBay listings and Facebook groups are given priority over someone like: http://www.lululemonoutlet.us/

Dennis Wilson, the Founder of Canadian athletic apparel company Lululemon Athletica ( LULU ), sold 377,415 shares of company stock for $30,824,472. The Vancouver-based company manufactures, sells, and distributes technical athletic clothing and yoga apparel; it works with athletes to create designs meant to meet their specific needs. Lululemon has been through a tumultuous few months, having to recall 17% of its yoga pants late last year for being see-through, and facing lawsuits and litigation from shareholders over an increase in executive pay a week before the recall. In the last three months, the company's stock price has increased by 17.09%, and it is up 8.33% since this time last year.

I actually did not know there was a lawsuit against them earlier this month :

"Less than a week before the revelations about the defective clothing, the company’s compensation committee approved changes to Lululemon’s executive bonus plan, according to the lawsuit. The changes increased by a third the potential bonus for executives who reached their performance goals, according to the lawsuit by the Hallandale Beach Police Officers and Firefighters’ Personnel Retirement Fund."

@ L - I'm not using the images to sell anything and using them for purposes of criticism/information so I think it's considered a fair use of the photo. From what I understand stock photos of products are not copyrightable under US law.

Lija and Sweaty Betty and Bluefish make decent workout wear. I can't understand how Lululemon can be so "on" then fail so dramatically, even intentionally it seems? They had our hearts and wallets and handed them both back to us.

Lululemon expends its energy on the most asinine of issues. Their bad business practices are driving loyal customers (like myself) away. It becomes harder and harder to bring myself to spend $100+ on lulu items when I think about whose pockets I am lining with my hard-earned money. Lulu, you are in the retail industry. That business depends on the support (money) of the public to stay in business. If you want to protect your brand, then go after the people who produce and sell impostors of your product. Don't go after the Facebook groups who support you.

I've been selling on ebay for years (not much Lulu, just some of my old things) and have always understood that photos are considered copyrighted material and can't be used. Many companies use VERO to end auctions using their photos. Honestly, I don't think Lululemon is in the wrong at all with this practice.

I can't comment on the FB group thing as I don't really know anything about it.

As far as Tabberone goes - I haven't thought about it in ages but IIRC she was fighting having auctions ended for using copyrighted images (such as NFL fabric she purchased and sewed into something else).

Anyway it will be interesting to see what transpires with all of this.

Just when you think you've heard it all - LLL shutting down FB groups! As someone else already stated, this company needs to get back to focusing on quality and design versus going after "theft" of photos.

It is very clear to me that LLL will do anythingto take attention off themselves, rather than actually fix the problems they have created. They seriously have their head in the sand.

I agree with shutting down eBay ads (or other sites) selling fakes. I agree that a legitimate eBay ad should have photos of the actual item the person is selling. If a seller also included a stock photo of the item from LLL, I don't think that's a big deal. It's also TFB for LLL if people are re-selling their LLL. It has been said many times on this board how often people are after old LLL and willing to pay the price via eBay. I myself have yet to buy a LLL item from eBay. I might end up becoming a seller though! I'm pretty sure I'm done with LLL retail.

As pissed off as many people are getting, it's not going to stop people from buying. I doubt lululaddict''s or lulumum's viewership has declined over the past few months or so. People will still buy the product, and as long as that happens, lululemon will do what it wants. Just my opinion.

Why is Lulu being sooooo stupid!!??? Tackle the people making and selling FAKE stuff, not the people on FB - who are essentially devotees and their most loyal customers. Why would anyone join a FB group unless they liked the brand? I would not waste my time liking Taco Bell, for instance, if I could not stand burritos.

As a very frequent eBay buyer, and only sometimes seller, I find stock photos really helpful. Of course I expect to see the pictures of the actual item for sale (to ensure its condition), but the stock photo can help me see the "original" version so that I know I am buying the right one.

I read that Tabberone article and very much agree - stock photos and product descriptions are released by companies in the first place to the public, and for informational purposes. Just because someone reuses those things (which were available to them as much as to the next person), especially when they are reselling an item from that company, does not mean the company is then losing any money - since the company made their money already, when the reseller bought it in the first place.

The reason Lulu is closing down FB groups and VERO'ing eBay is because they use the scarcity model. If customers could readily access Lulu stuff in stores all the time, then they might not need to look elsewhere for items. Lulu -you can't have it both ways. You go with the scarcity model, and now you see that it is definitely not perfect. So suck it up or don't do scarcity anymore.

Going Big Brother like this is only going to alienate your best customers.

I've support LLL through a lot: color bleeding issues, alteration/discontinuation of some of my favorite styles, deteriorating quality, crappy refund & no price adjustment policies - especially post Boxing Week, sheerness issues, price hikes. Most of that stuff hit me in the wallet or on the outside, but this FB thing is ideological.

We do not live in Cuba, North Korea, or China. Countries where Lululemon stuff is sold are mostly free and democratic. LLL is acting like a communist dictator and we do not have to take it.

If enough of us speak out, spread the word about this conduct then they will have to listen. If they don't, then they don't deserve my money anymore.

Did any of you ever talk to some reporters, back when LLL pulled the black pants due to sheerness issues? Anyone have journalistic contacts?

I understand LLL's stance on use of their product images. But removing eBay listings for making a profit? On what grounds? I'd be happy to use my unused law degree to fight that battle. But the last straw (or rather the last dollar spent on LLL items) for me is when they stopped publishing less-than-stellar product reviews. I've depended on those reviews to purchase many items and I repay the LLL community by offering fair reviews of my own. If I spend the time to create a truthful and fair review, I expect them to publish it. If they don't, I can no longer trust them.

I am a long time Lulu lover, since they opened DAY 1! I have read everything about all of this and my thoughts are WHY??? I see all the explinations offered by everyone, as to the why...but it makes no sense whatsoever!

If its for the reason to come down on all the people selling "fake Lulu" and all the fake Lulu websites popping up, then fine....shut some things down, but I dont believe thats the true reason. I say that because myself and a bunch of people I know....have contacted Lulu multiple times and reported various fake Lulu websites. See people reporting it all the time on their FB wall too! Lulu has dont NOTHING to shut them down! Its been at least a year and a bit...& we STILL all see the same websites selling fake Lulu...up and running. I dont want to hear all the BS that Lulu is protecting their brand and doing something about it. BS! They are just playing some sort of game here. Its like shutting down all the banks, instead of arresting the bank robbers. LOL...

the answer is simple, people- DON'T BUY LULULEMON. trust me, the people outraged already have enough lulu to last them until a better company comes out. JUST USE WHAT YOU HAVE and wait. You have MORE THAN YOU NEED. seriously. all the whining and outrage from people who continue buying!

LLL needs to hire a better and more experienced relationship/press manager. They are really making themselves a laughing stock now.

@6:02 AM There are already better company out there, or rather "old" company producing similar products with much higher quality. I think the reason ppl were so angry about lulu is because they/we all LOVED LLL products so much, for years, and now everything they did were basically saying: we don't care about our customer, if you don't like it, don't buy it (look at some of the official response to the reviews of their products on the official website, so rude and careless).

I understand that many of us have a variety of reasons to be upset with LLL. However, I think people are missing a key point: just because a Facebook group is private does not mean that Facebook's terms of service are suddenly inapplicable. The terms of service (which we all agree to when we create our account) clearly state: "You will not post any content...that infringes or violates someone else's rights or otherwise violates the law." And: "We can remove any content or information you post on Facebook if we believe that it violates this Statement or our policies." (Key phrase: IF WE BELIEVE). This means that if FB even BELIEVES--not "conclusively knows," not "knows as a fact," but "believes"--that content violates someone else's rights, it has the authority to remove the content. FB does say that if you believe that it removed content by mistake, it will give you an opportunity to appeal.

LLL cannot just "close down a Facebook group" without Facebook's cooperation. FB must have determined that the content being posted created enough of a risk of liability for infringement that unilaterally closing groups or removing content was warranted. Admittedly, I don't know enough about the origin of the group closing events to know whether LLL contacted FB to report possible infringement, or whether FB, on its own initiative, decided that posting of brand photographs was a violation of its terms of service.

7:53, what i meant was, if people are sticking with lulu solely because they believe it is or was the best out there, then they should STOP and wait for another company (if they don't like existing "old" companies). Lulu has gone downhill, and YES IT SUCKS - but it is lulu's prerogative to make lesser quality items if they choose, and to participate in shoddy business practices if they choose. It is your/consumer's choice to either keep enabling those business practices or simply refuse. People really just MUST STOP BUYING if they're unhappy with the business or the product. Period! Trust me, I LOVED lulu! i went thru phases spending thousands a month on them - about FOUR YEARS AGO. I haven't bought a groove pant or a wunder under since. Yes, i'm sure im wearing the oldest designs and colors out there at the gym (REVERSE GROOVES FOLDOVER, anyone????? i know, right!!!??) but i refuse to buy the lame quality lulu offered now.

Clearly FB should worry less about LLL groups and photos of clothing, and work on taking down sites with "countless pages depicting, condoning and encouraging violence against women", which "are allowed to exist on Facebook under the guise of humour, free speech or not being considered “real-world” violence." The article states FB moderators have not been twiddling their thumbs, but I think that's debatable.

I have a new theory on all this - I actually think maybe it is a competitor of LLL that is doing this. And making it seem that it is LLL. They see a huge opening to the market and are jumping on the chance. LLL certainly created the opening themselves.

@ 4:22 PM, theoretically some other company cannot have Facebook groups taken down by FB. FB would (should) be acting on an official complaint from LLL to take down the groups because of the copyright on the photos. Presumably they would have vetted the person complaining to confirm they are acting in official capacity at LLL. Also, as someone else already pointed out, there should be a warning to take down the pictures before just shutting down the group. It seems pretty harsh when they are innocent photos of retail clothing.

About Me

For 18 years I was an electrical engineer working in communications satellite system engineering. I've worked at Boeing, Booz, Allen & Hamilton, and General Electric. For the past ten years I've been a stay at home mom who keeps busy volunteering in my community and chauffeuring my three children to their activities. I live in Orange County, California.

The inaugural Sea Wheeze inspired me to take up running two years ago. I have completed nine half marathons and have two more scheduled for 2015. I mostly run these days but also go to the gym ~3-4 days a week for spin class, weight lifting, and cardio.

I discovered Lululemon six years ago and really liked the fit and performance of the clothes. I do check out other brands so if you would like me to review your product please contact me.

If you would like to contact me, my email address is lululemonaddict@gmail.com.